Context: Nokia and ASUS are embroiled in multijurisdictional litigation. The latest major development was a successful interim-license appeal by Nokia in the UK (May 12, 2026 ip fray article). The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) is investigating a Nokia complaint targeting ASUS and Acer.
What’s new: Yesterday, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John A. Squires initiated a sua sponte Director review after a petition for review by Nokia against a petition by ASUS for an inter partes review (IPR) of Nokia’s U.S. Patent No. 10,536,716 (“Method for coding and an apparatus”) had been thrown out as untimely. What caught the Director’s interest in the matter is the fact that ASUS may have violated a Sotera stipulation, which is the next best thing to a safe harbor when requesting a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) IPR and seeking to convince the USPTO that there is no overlap between the scope of the IPR and the invalidity contentions pursued as a defense to an infringement action.
Direct impact: Director Squires ordered further briefing. The order does not prejudge the matter, but the order says Nokia’s “allegations raise serious concerns given that [ASUS’s] briefing in the ITC investigation appears to raise the same invalidity theories argued in the IPR petition”. That means ASUS has some explaining to do, and it won’t be easy. The deadline for the parties’ submissions is Tuesday (June 2, 2026). For the time being, the IPR proceedings are stayed.
Wider ramifications: This intervention shows that Director Squires does not allow IPR petitioners to break promises that may have been outcome-determinative when deciding not to deny a petition on discretionary grounds. Director interventions are a clear signal to USPTO staff. Here, Nokia’s objection should not have been rejected for being out of time.
This is the Director’s order:
This is the negative answer Nokia had originally received from the USPTO on May 14, 2026:
Counsel,
A Decision Granting Institution in the above-referenced proceeding was issued on December 11, 2025. Any request for Director Review was due within 14 days of the Decision Granting Institution, or December 29, 2025. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.75(c)(1) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(d). Patent Owner’s request for Director Review (Paper 26), filed on May 8, 2026, requesting the Director to reconsider the Board’s decision is untimely and will not be considered. Patent Owner’s request for waiver of the deadline to file its request for Director Review is denied.
But “the alleged Sotera violation giving rise to the Request occurred after the deadline”, Director Squires notes.
This is ASUS’s Sotera stipulation:
And this is Nokia’s petition that has, even if not initially, led to a Director review:
There are two prior art references at issue. Nokia says ASUS is leveraging the same pair against the patent in the PTAB as well as the ITC proceedings, the only difference (according to Nokia) being tha a third prior art reference is additionally used against a single dependent claim.